It is a shame that some people here can't do what I did, and look across Hampton Roads, and wonder how they will ever build 8 Interstate lanes and 4 arterial lanes across 4 miles of deep water (as in deep enough and wide enough to accommodate a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier or a fleet of them for that matter).

I wasn't around to see any of it built sadly. Now the question is how will they ever build 8 more interstate lanes across 4 miles of deep water.

There is nowhere in Hampton Roads area except the CBBT where four miles of deep water is crossed. (The CBBT is mostly in waters 40'-50' deep.) Most of the water within the Hampton Roads basin is under 30 feet deep. It's only in the dredged deep-water channels where depth exceeds 30 feet. The widest deep water is the turnaround deep basin alongside the navy base which is a mile across. The approaches to the MMMBT and HRBT are in waters less than 30 feet deep. Building new crossings of Hampton Roads would be fairly simple if the USN didn't prohibit bridges across the channel between the shipyards and the ocean.

There is nothing simple about building a crossing 3.5 miles long or 4.6 miles long across a harbor that could moor 12 Nimitz-class aircraft carriers at once.

I misworded some with the implication that it is 40+ feet deep all the way across, but my point remains.

The 1862 battle of the ironclads took place near Sewells Point, where the I-664 North Island is today, and that required water at least 22 feet deep.

A high-level bridge would be no piece of cake. Given the shipping requirements, the main span would need to be at least 2,000 feet wide and 180 feet high, and some of the high-level approaches would extend partway over land. The Navy and other maritime interests may request at least 3,000 feet wide.

While not a segment that I've never driven on per se, the 2 mile section of I-94 in both directions just west of St. Cloud between the CSAH 75 interchange (exit 158) and the CSAH 2 interchange (exit 160) is a section of freeway that I've only ever been on two or three times despite having lived nearby for 15+ years. When I had to go eastbound, I'd use exit 160; when I had to go westbound, I'd use CSAH 75 via exit 158. Even now, I still bypass that section when headed westbound because of how accessible the CSAH 75 interchange is heading out of St. Cloud.

Interestingly, the MTO suggests it goes all the way down to Coules Ct. But it seems weird that the MTO would maintain the road south of this intersection

Hmm. I don't keep track of my exact travels through travel mapping or anything like that, but I would consider myself to have clinched ON 427 without having been on that short segment, and for a few reasons:

(1) That segment is visible from the southbound to westbound flyover.(2) ON 427 is not signed as continuing past the Gardiner (the sign on the right would need to have an ON 427 shield, and it doesn't).(3) Google Maps identifies the connectors as ramps, not part of a mainline route.